If the amount of downsizing in welfare money given out was as small as I(and I assume SF41 as well) wanted it to be, then there would be plenty of money leftover for hiring "Welfare Watchers" to see what the recipients are doing with our money.

 

I don't want to know how many welfare recipients continually buy cigarettes, have cable TV, and other luxuries.

If you can drive up to the welfare office in a nice car.....step out wearing nice clothes with lots of gold jewels on your fingers, in your ears, in your nose.....................smoking a cigarette and talking on a cell phone....then you need to turn around and get back into your nice car...cause I'm tired of my tax money supporting you.

 

My mother supported 6 kids on what little social security she got......she asked no one, I repeat NO ONE, for any help. She got no welfare, food stamps, medical cards....nothing. How did she do it....she worked like a dog....she cleaned houses for people, she washed and ironed clothes for people, she sewed clothes for people. SHE WORKED....That is a concept that some people today don't have. Get a job. There are jobs out there if you are willing to work. Oh it might not pay you $20 a hour but most don't. Work to raise the child you had....don't expect me to raise all your children for the first 18 years of their lives.

If you can drive up to the welfare office in a nice car.....step out wearing nice clothes with lots of gold jewels on your fingers, in your ears, in your nose.....................smoking a cigarette and talking on a cell phone....then you need to turn around and get back into your nice car...cause I'm tired of my tax money supporting you.

 

My mother supported 6 kids on what little social security she got......she asked no one, I repeat NO ONE, for any help. She got no welfare, food stamps, medical cards....nothing. How did she do it....she worked like a dog....she cleaned houses for people, she washed and ironed clothes for people, she sewed clothes for people. SHE WORKED....That is a concept that some people today don't have. Get a job. There are jobs out there if you are willing to work. Oh it might not pay you $20 a hour but most don't. Work to raise the child you had....don't expect me to raise all your children for the first 18 years of their lives.

RebelK....you are a strange breed of Democrat, but I agree with you.

 

I had a job that paid $11.25 an hour, 40 hours a week (occasional overtime), and fairly frequent raises. Some days (actually mornings, because it was 3rd shift) they would tell us that we could leave or stay. I never needed the money (I have been very fortunate) but I liked making money so I would stay. Usually, only 3 of us would stay- one of the notable absentees was the single mother who always complained to me that she needed the hours badly.

 

It isn't that I don't feel sympathy, but not as much as most people, I guess.

RebelK....you are a strange breed of Democrat, but I agree with you.

 

I had a job that paid $11.25 an hour, 40 hours a week (occasional overtime), and fairly frequent raises. Some days (actually mornings, because it was 3rd shift) they would tell us that we could leave or stay. I never needed the money (I have been very fortunate) but I liked making money so I would stay. Usually, only 3 of us would stay- one of the notable absentees was the single mother who always complained to me that she needed the hours badly.

 

It isn't that I don't feel sympathy, but not as much as most people, I guess.

:fight::lol::lol: That's o-kay...I'm just a strange breed:lol::lol:

Take the child away. Give the child to someone who can pay. Children cost money, just like loaves of bread. Get churches and charities and communities involved, but not government or tax dollars.

 

I don't think the country is ready for a govt organization who makes the determination of whether you're fit to keep your child. How do you quanitify the rules?

So you advocate the govt (already shorthanded) making a determination at to one's level of "fit?"

 

You actually trust the government to make such a subjective decision?

 

More so than alot of the dead beat parents that can't take care of themselves, let alone a child.

I don't think the country is ready for a govt organization who makes the determination of whether you're fit to keep your child. How do you quanitify the rules?

 

We do that already.

 

Fine, don't take the child away. Just tell Mom, you had five years to get on your feet, now there is no more money for you. By the way, we have this loving family here to take your child if you don't think you are able.

I don't think the country is ready for a govt organization who makes the determination of whether you're fit to keep your child. How do you quanitify the rules?

 

You ever been to a family court where that decision is made almost EVERY SINGLE DAY.

Interesting choice for your analogy, Covercorner. :lol:

Just trying to make sure the smilies still work in P&R:D

 

 

 

Guess I could have used the Nailgun instead.

When you become active sexually is a faith and morals act and the schools should be out of the business of doing that if they are not allowed to bring God and the expectations of faith into the issue.

When you become active sexually is a faith and morals act and the schools should be out of the business of doing that if they are not allowed to bring God and the expectations of faith into the issue.

 

It is not a faith and morals act for a lot of people, even thought it is for you.

 

Let the schools teach proper planning and if you are against it, you can opt out or you can choose a different school.

 

Why should my religion keep someone else's child from learning about contraception and the risks thereof.

 

the local health department comes to my school for a week long sex ed. class, maybe two weeks I can't remember.

 

The one thing they say EVERY DAY is that ABSTINENCE is the only 100% way to prevent pregnancy and STIs.

 

They also say . . . the rhythm method doesn't work so if you have heard that it does, don't believe it (I think this is good information for them to have). They say "condoms are this % effective but you always run the risk of it breaking and that if you use a condom be sure to use one with a spermacide as well. Birth Control pills are this % effective but the only 100% effective way is ABSTINENCE - it is a powerful message and does not encourage sex at all. As a matter of fact the photos they show of STIs are so gross it almost scares me celibate.

It is not a faith and morals act for a lot of people, even thought it is for you.

 

Let the schools teach proper planning and if you are against it, you can opt out or you can choose a different school.

 

Why should my religion keep someone else's child from learning about contraception and the risks thereof.

 

the local health department comes to my school for a week long sex ed. class, maybe two weeks I can't remember.

 

The one thing they say EVERY DAY is that ABSTINENCE is the only 100% way to prevent pregnancy and STIs.

 

They also say . . . the rhythm method doesn't work so if you have heard that it does, don't believe it (I think this is good information for them to have). They say "condoms are this % effective but you always run the risk of it breaking and that if you use a condom be sure to use one with a spermacide as well. Birth Control pills are this % effective but the only 100% effective way is ABSTINENCE - it is a powerful message and does not encourage sex at all. As a matter of fact the photos they show of STIs are so gross it almost scares me celibate.

 

So why does it have to be in schools.

Have some local seminar on it.

 

I found your last paragraph interesting because if the Palin girl was using contraceptives of some point, she could be in the EXACT same condition she is now.

 

If she WAS practicing Abstinence, she would not be.

 

Let the schools teach proper planning and if you are against it, you can opt out or you can choose a different school.

 

Why should my religion keep someone else's child from learning about contraception and the risks thereof.

If school vouchers were in effect, then this would be as big of a deal.

 

But with the current situation, some people can't (and shouldn't be forced to) pay more to keep their child away from what they perceive as evil. Until parents have a choice as to what school their child can attend, you can't force them to support something with their money that they think is immoral.

So why does it have to be in schools.

Have some local seminar on it.

.

 

 

Because it is something about which kids need to be educated. Knowledge is power.

Take the child away. Give the child to someone who can pay. Children cost money, just like loaves of bread. Get churches and charities and communities involved, but not government or tax dollars.

Thank you. Charity is an individual and private choice, not something that the government should pay for.

I don't think the country is ready for a govt organization who makes the determination of whether you're fit to keep your child. How do you quanitify the rules?

What do you think social workers and family courts have been doing for years? If the country isn't ready for it...too late. It's been going on for a very long time.